MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1500592657 · doi:10.1111/cars.12000

Discipline, Field, Nexus: Re‐Visioning Sociology

2013· article· fr· W1500592657 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose une reconceptualisation de la discipline sociologique ainsi que de sa place dans le monde actuel. Nous remettrons tout d'abord en question l'idée même que la sociologie puisse être considérée en tant que discipline académique dans le sens habituel du terme, tout comme le fait qu'il soit possible de distinguer, à la manière des sciences de la nature, autant de disciplines distinctes au sein du champ des sciences sociales. Au contraire, nous defendrons la thèse selon laquelle la sociologie et ses disciplines connexes furent plutôt constitueés en tant que champs sociaux à travers un processus historique particulier. Cette analyse nous permettra de réaffirmer la position centrale qu'occupe la sociologie dans le champ de la recherche sociale, de par les liens étroits qu'elle entretient avec les autres disciplines qui constituent ce champ, ainsi que par sa nature interdisciplinaire et critique. Cette reconceptualisation implique qu'une ontologie sociale claire fondée sur une méthodologie cohérente, en l'occurence le réalisme critique, puisse remédier aux tendences centrifuges propre à la discipline, en renforçant sa capacité à analyser les problèmes sociaux, et donc à contribuer à défendre et à élargir les pratiques démocratiques au fondement d'un avenir meilleur. This article proposes a re‐visioning of sociology and of its relationship to the late‐modern world it inhabits. I first problematize the claim that sociology is a discipline in any ordinary sense of the term, indeed, that social science can be reasonably cleaved into “disciplines” on the model of natural science. I then explore the thesis that sociology and kindred pursuits have been constituted as fields. Finally, I argue that among the fields of social scientific inquiry, the sociological terrain is of great import, as a nexus whose permeability, dense connectivity to other fields and critical transdisciplinarity are prime assets. By implication, the remedy for centrifugal tendencies that worry some sociologists is greater clarity on matters of social ontology and, on that basis, a coherent methodology (critical realism) that can strengthen sociology's capacity to understand our troubled world and to defend and enrich democratic practices that may portend a better future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it